Thanks! This game was a heck of a lot of fun to develop too. I still fondly remember how it all started - in December 2011 I started messing around with a main menu screen using WW1 leader portraits as something to do on Christmas break, and that ultimately led to doing a Guns of August short mod over the course of 2012. So much of this game just sprung out of tinkering with the scripting options available in AGE and seeing what could be done to simulate WW1.

Altaris wrote:Thanks! This game was a heck of a lot of fun to develop too. I still fondly remember how it all started - in December 2011 I started messing around with a main menu screen using WW1 leader portraits as something to do on Christmas break, and that ultimately led to doing a Guns of August short mod over the course of 2012. So much of this game just sprung out of tinkering with the scripting options available in AGE and seeing what could be done to simulate WW1.

Just like I have already said Altaris, I like the game and looks and many small details, map is gorgeus (one of best in any wargame!) but guillotine the guy who have programmed game interface hahaha (just kidin of course!)

Game interface (and that save game thing) is very important - you could sell a lot more games if you try to make game interface a little bit accessible to the players. You don't have to take away soul or anything from the game.

But maybe AGEod is insisting in using this game interface and voila ! Well, then it can't be helped - I know that some thing are done in interface right from the start. Game could be challenging and easy to play and hard to master like many other classics, just skip torture of players by game interface.

Sorry for this rant but yesterday I have stopped playing EAW, I might try again but I was so pissed off when I realized that I don't know where the hell my armies are going it was mess and save game feature is not helping at at all (I am afraid that pc will not save game right). That's why TOTAW WAR series are sold 20 million units and we wargamers may ridicule TOTAL WAR (ok I am almost tired of concept but...) but those guys at CA knows what will sell the game (and I am not talking just about graphics!). Some say Gary Grisby War in the East but that game once you read manual everything is crystal clear to you and makes sense! You can see logic there!Sorry but in some instances I don't see logic in EAW. So unfortunately this will not be number one WW1 game and I was so looking forward to it. I mean it is great game but with horrendeous game interface that is designed to torture players. So many things getting in the way of play...

I hope that I will learn the game and I have already am I think but I don't like when you are tired of playing... We play also to relax.

Sorry to hear you've stopped playing it Conrad. The AGE engine does have its quirks, and it's been around quite a long time now (about 10 years) so it doesn't have all the nice bells and whistles. It was also largely coded by Pocus on his own, which is no small feat.

But what AGE has going for it, IMO, is a very stable platform that's worked well in a wide range of games from the 17th to early 20th centuries. I like Paradox games too, and while the interfaces are very sleek and nice, I always find myself wishing they had deeper combat mechanics such as AGE, rather than super stack 1 beats super stack 2 nearly all the time due to a simple which stack is bigger model. AGE makes you think and plan, especially against a human opponent.

Altaris wrote:Sorry to hear you've stopped playing it Conrad. The AGE engine does have its quirks, and it's been around quite a long time now (about 10 years) so it doesn't have all the nice bells and whistles. It was also largely coded by Pocus on his own, which is no small feat.

But what AGE has going for it, IMO, is a very stable platform that's worked well in a wide range of games from the 17th to early 20th centuries. I like Paradox games too, and while the interfaces are very sleek and nice, I always find myself wishing they had deeper combat mechanics such as AGE, rather than super stack 1 beats super stack 2 nearly all the time due to a simple which stack is bigger model. AGE makes you think and plan, especially against a human opponent.

Hopefully you'll pick it back up one day.

I will not leave don't worry as i really appreciate all the effort that you guys have put into your games - that is certanly labour of love! And I admire that you have covered many conflicts that no one dare to cover.

To tell you the truth you are right - I have played to death all Paradox games (or almost all, my PC is not good enough for Hoi4) but I've played them all EU 1-4, HoI 1-3, CK 2, Victoria 1 and 2 etc... and you are right they left a bitter taste esp. reg combat (and ridiculous retreat of armies after combat etc...) so AGEod is needed by allmeans because I think that you will make it one day and score big. Dont worry you will have my support and if I can have this liberty some advice from time to time

One other game system that is not so bad is from BattleGoat Studios, Supreme Ruler 2010 and 2020 etc... Well, I played SR2010 quite a lot and yes, if you give that game time, it really has something - there is some flaws because game simulates a big numbers of units so there could be some problems but game is really fun once you get it in the right way and have some cool design choices.

Why I have mentioning TOTAL WAR series by Creative Assembly, but Heroes have that as well (HOMM) and some others - that is that easy to learn and hard to master feeling, game interface is simple intuitive and doesn't get into way of play. But I have played to death Total War series but obviously they know how to cater to players needs as they are basically recycling same thing since 2001. I think, Shogun 1. You have startegy part of managing your "kingdom" and you have really interesting, adrenaline fueled, intense RTS battles on separate tactical level.Or you have KOEI approach (Infogrames France distributed them early in 90s I think) they had very interesting Napoleon game with turn based tactical combat that was really fun (L'Empereur in France). It was DOS era, They had some other games in that series and also Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Nobunaga etc.

AGEod is fresh, and I know that eventually you will make some cool game (I don't say that games that you made in the past were bad -, no quite contrary) - I mean cool in the terms of some really cool, fresh idea - AGEod engine as engine is good basis, everything else is imaginatin of game developers

Well, you are right. I REALLY like the game. I am fallen in love with this map, and there are many, many neat details that we wargamers and history lovers love. I have deep knowledge of WW1 so that is a plus - that's why I am interested in this game.

Certanly this is best WW1 game as there is almost none there whatsoever speaking of quality. AGEod have also WW1 game, I mean other WW1 game (I didn't played it but seems ok)... I stand by this that this is best WW1 game.

But it is hard to love this game interface - Gary Grisby WITE for example on the first looks looks like enormous task to learn but in fact it was designed in mind to be played fast and very clean design in fact.

I will play this game don't worry I just need time. I was maybe spoiled a little bit with some other games and now I am a little bored because I need game that is fun like Total War games and that is in the same time about war or history etc... I am bored of Paradox games already have so many saves like Japan in HoI 3 but cannot make myself to play it because obviously I am a little bit fed up with that kind of "map games"

Once you find a reliable PBEM partner I think interface wouldn't be a problem and the learning curve. Wargames demand patience and by playing against an opponent it can cause a stress. Unlike Paradox games -they are played by mainstream gamers for fun; forming nations, customising culture groups- there is more of a urgency of synchronous movements and thinking about the best way to play a turn here.

I've played strategic command ww1 pbem through 1918 and EAW pbem through summer 1917, I can say EAW is very good.

When I choose Moltke plan my two armies (1st and 2nd I think) are cramped in one province (there I got lost) well:

1. Are armies only containers so they are not fighting or? I am asking this because there are also corps, I imagine that they do most of the fighting so it is wise to put as many units into Corps as command limit permits?I know stupid question and obviously armies do fight I guess but what is best way to move armies individually by corps or it is best to merge them? Do support units give bonuses only to armies and not corps that are attached to them?

2. What is best way to arrange armies or corps? And I forgot how later corps could be attached to armies (if they can)? Stupid questions, maybe I will have more...

Baris wrote:Once you find a reliable PBEM partner I think interface wouldn't be a problem and the learning curve. Wargames demand patience and by playing against an opponent it can cause a stress. Unlike Paradox games -they are played by mainstream gamers for fun; forming nations, customising culture groups- there is more of a urgency of synchronous movements and thinking about the best way to play a turn here.

I've played strategic command ww1 pbem through 1918 and EAW pbem through summer 1917, I can say EAW is very good.

Quite right. I will learn the game even if I lose first time. Well, I could be patient, I played all kinds of wargames so I can be patient. My grandfather fought in WW1 on Eastern Front btw (on AH side).

Good we're on the same side then. My great grandfather fought Libya in deserts, during the time 7 years of active duty was compulsory.

1- As with other AGEOD games it is better to use max command limit. 24 in corps +50 armies as far as I remember. May depend on strategic rating of a leader. Support units will have benefit only in a stack where they are present. GHQ will give leadership (Off, Def etc..)bonuses only to armies not corps. Any corps will MTSG as long as any other corps or army structure in adjacent region is present. No need to micromanage like in RUS or CW'2.

2- Best way to arrange cops is 2 units of regular units+ artiilery regiments or more militia units. There needs to be 9 elements in total.

Baris wrote:Good we're on the same side then. My great grandfather fought Libya in deserts, during the time 7 years of active duty was compulsory.

1- As with other AGEOD games it is better to use max command limit. 24 in corps +50 armies as far as I remember. May depend on strategic rating of a leader. Support units will have benefit only in a stack where they are present. GHQ will give leadership (Off, Def etc..)bonuses only to armies not corps. Any corps will MTSG as long as any other corps or army structure in adjacent region is present. No need to micromanage like in RUS or CW'2.

2- Best way to arrange cops is 2 units of regular units+ artiilery regiments or more militia units. There needs to be 9 elements in total.

Thank you very much for your answers. Well, I started Fallen Enchantress in the meantime and Risen 1 but I will not play any of these much something is drawing me to the trenches of World War 1....

Hehhe, yes, btw Senussi uprising is interesting topic when we speak about Libya... I was also thinking something like that. Will report from the front.